Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Ian Hudspeth and

Councillor Hilary Hibbert-Biles

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 26 January 2015 (CA3 (to be circulated separately)) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 January 2016 were approved and signed.

Councillor Bartholomew to Councillor Nimmo Smith

“Various Berkshire councils and enterprise groups have been campaigning vigorously in recent years for a new Thames crossing known as the 'Third Reading Bridge'. It is likely this bridge would link the end of the A329(M) in Berkshire to Playhatch in Oxfordshire. The enthusiasm of the scheme promoters is not shared by many Oxfordshire residents who are concerned about the large amount of extra traffic that would be deposited on to already congested rural roads. Historically, both OCC and SODC have shared residents' concerns, but both councils recently agreed to contribute to a traffic modelling study in order to remain part of the process. I have learnt that this study has now been named 'Strategic Outline Business Case', which worryingly seems to indicate that all parties are supporters of the proposal. I would be grateful if the Cabinet Member could confirm the costs involved in the study and provide reassurance that any resultant proposals will be challenged to ensure they best meet the needs of Oxfordshire residents.”

Cabinet Member for Environment

“The term Strategic Outline Business Case is the technical terminology of an in depth traffic modelling assessment for a specific transport scheme  – it is neutral in its approach and can come to a negative as well as positive conclusion and will also need to consider wider impacts beyond direct traffic impact and mitigation including potential environment, economic and social impacts.

The County Council has agreed to support the study to finally provide detailed analysis of the impacts of a third Thames crossing scheme. It has been made clear to the other partners in this piece of work, that the council, by helping to fund this work, is not inherently supporting the scheme and will await the results of this work before taking a position on whether to support a full business case submission for funding, this decision process will also involve further consultation with the communities a scheme may impact upon.

Oxfordshire is contributing £20,000 towards the modelling work.  Beyond the Third Thames Crossing assessment work, the council will also benefit more generally as the new transport model that is being developed, will be available to Oxfordshire Councils for their own transport studies and scheme analysis and will provide in- depth coverage of South of Oxfordshire and overlap with our own Strategic Transport Model.  This will provide this part of the county with an even more robust evidence base for transport scheme development and decision making.”

Supplementary

“I would be obliged for sight of the briefing document/study specification and confirmation of the date results are expected.”

Cabinet Member for Environment

“I will pass the information onto Councillor Bartholomew.”

Councillor Susanna Pressel

“I’m very worried about the threatened loss of services for the people I represent in Jericho. At present they have a new, purpose-built, fully equipped and professionally staffed children’s centre in Cutteslowe and a Baby Café in Jericho. It would be appalling if one or both of these were to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14/16

Cabinet Member: Children, Education & Families

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/118

Contact: Jim Leivers, Director for Children’s Services Tel: (01865) 815122

Report of the Director for Children’s Services (CA6)

Children’s Services in Oxfordshire has and continues to be a primary priority for the Council and its partners. In particular, keeping children safe is of critical importance to the Council and as such the Authority has a clear explicit resource commitment to supporting the most vulnerable within the community. There is however significant pressures and challenges facing public sector services that mean the current status quo arrangements are not sustainable. This item comprises an overview report together with a series of three reports which cover in some detail:

• The outcome of public consultation regarding proposals for change to early help services, including, children’s centres and early intervention hubs

• Proposals for the future shape of Education and Learning Services

• Proposals for future safeguarding and Corporate Parenting Services

• Proposals for future Children’s Social Care services.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a) receive the outcome of the consultation exercise on the future of early help services along with the proposed alternative arrangements for Children’s Services as outlined in the Cabinet Advisory Group report of September 2015 along with recommendations from the Director of Children’s Services regarding future organisational arrangements for Children’s Social Care;

(b) approve the proposed arrangements for Safeguarding and Corporate parenting services as outlined in the attached report;

(c)approve the proposed arrangements for Education Services as outlined in the attached report; and

(d) receive a further detailed report on the implementation of the proposed changes.

The Cabinet had before it an overview report together with a series of three supporting reports covering:

• The outcome of public consultation regarding proposals for change to early help services, including, children’s centres and early intervention hubs

• Proposals for the future shape of Education and Learning Services

• Proposals for future Safeguarding and Corporate Parenting Services

• Proposals for future Children’s Social Care services.

The resolution set out below incorporates the recommendations from Agenda Items 6, 6(a), 6(b) and 6(c).

The Deputy Leader of the Council set out the terms of the decision made by Council on 16 February 2016 to reinstate £2 million from early intervention services, including Children’s Centres and Early Intervention Hubs, originally earmarked as part of the identified budget reductions.  In addition Council further agreed to make available an additional £1million short term funding to develop alternative working arrangements with District Councils and local voluntary groups to allow a number of Children’s Centres to remain open but be funded from sources other than the County Council.  It was agreed that the detail of how the reinstated funding was to be used should be identified at a later date. Consequently, Cabinet would consider at this meeting the recommendations of the Director of Children, Education and Families regarding the future of Children’s Services as laid out in the various reports before it and that in addition the Director be required to provide to a future meeting of Cabinet detailed proposals as to how the additional and retained funding arrangements would be best utilised. 

The Council’s Monitoring Officer drew the Cabinet’s attention to a letter received from Central England Law Centre challenging the Council’s decisions regarding the radical reorganisation of children’s centres in Oxfordshire. The letter stated that the decisions taken had been fundamentally flawed and therefore challengeable. However, he advised that in his view the letter had failed to take into account the terms of the Council’s decision taken in February insofar as a further report would be submitted to Cabinet with proposals as to how the extra £2m might be used whereas the Cabinet, at this meeting, was considering establishment of Hubs for the delivery on intervention services with no decisions scheduled to be taken with regard to specific closures of Children’s Centres. He added that the consultation process, which it had been claimed, was flawed had in his opinion been conducted correctly.

Presenting a paper setting out the comments from the Performance Review Scrutiny Committee regarding proposed future arrangements for children’s services Councillor Liz Brighouse referred to the long scrutiny process which had been carried and thanked officers for the work in developing the proposals and undertaking the extensive consultation.

Speaking on behalf of the Chalgrove/Watlington Children’s Centre and Maple Tree (Wheatley) Children’s Centre Steering Groups David Turner recognised the difficult position the County Council found itself in but a great deal of uncertainty existed with regard to future provision and he was particularly concerned regarding provision in rural areas whose need was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16/16

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/097

Contact: Kathy Wilcox, Chief Accountant Tel: (01865) 323981

Report by Chief Finance Officer (CA7).

This report focuses on the management of the 2015/16 budget.   Parts 1 and 2 include projections for revenue, reserves and balances as at the end of December 2015. Capital Programme monitoring is included at Part 3.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)                note the report;

(b)               note the Treasury Management lending list at Annex 4;

(c)                approve an increase of £0.935m for the A34 Milton Interchange scheme;

(d)               approve the full budget of £11.165m for the Eastern Arc Phase 1: Access to Headington project and to proceed to detailed design; and

(e)                note the changes to the Capital Programme set out in Annex 7b and 7c.

The Cabinet considered (CA7) a report focusing on the management of the 2015/16 budget together with an additional recommendation as set out in the addenda.  

Councillor Hards referred to the high variance on the Children, Education & Families Directorate. The increased use of taxis for home to school transport for children with special needs clearly emphasised the need to progress provision of additional special needs facilities as proposed for example in the Didcot valley. He was pleased to see underspends on mainstream transport and education entitlement for disadvantaged two year olds but with regard to the forecast overspend on Children’s Social Care (paragraph 12) he asked whether there was any prospect of a reduction in the number of looked after children and queried the need for increased use of agency staff. He also sought an explanation why the Didcot station car park expansion scheme had slipped and why the Milton Interchange scheme was forecast to overspend.

Responding Councillor Stratford advised that he understood the Didcot Station car park had reverted to its original programme and he would write separately to Councillor Hards with regard to the Milton interchange.  He agreed with concerns regarding use of taxis and the need to expand special school facilities in the south of the county. The increase in numbers of looked after children reflected the sensitivity of officers to their particular needs and he supported the levels of spend to offset any possibility of risk to children. He would look at the use of agency staff.

He confirmed that budgets would continue to be managed aggressively but felt that generally all Directorates were doing a good job to come in either very close to or within budget. Inevitably Children Education & Families faced the biggest challenge but it was imperative that everything that should be done was done to safeguard children at risk. Un-ringfenced reserves were perilously close to maximum level but any impact on school balances would be lessened as more schools attained academy status. He moved the recommendations in the report and addenda.

Councillor Heathcote hoped that negotiations with the Oxfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group for an additional contribution to offset part of the overspend relating to Non-Emergency Patient Transport would continue favourably.

RESOLVED: to

(a)             note the report CA7;

(b)             note the Treasury Management lending list at Annex 4 to the report CA7;

(c)             approve an increase of £0.935m for the A34 Milton Interchange scheme;

(d)             approve the full budget of £11.165m for the Eastern Arc Phase 1: Access to Headington project and to proceed to detailed design;

(e)             note the changes to the Capital Programme set out in Annex 7b and 7c to the report CA7;

(f)              approve the allocation of the un-ringfenced grant for Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme to the Fire and Rescue Service.

Cabinet Member: Children, Education & Families

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/117

Contact: Matthew Edwards, Corporate Parenting Manager Tel: (01865) 323098

Report by Director for Children’s Services (CA8).

This report reviews the performance and outcomes of Looked After Children and Care Leavers  since April 2014 and identifies key challenges moving forward particularly around understanding the causes for and then addressing the growth in the looked after population.

It focuses on the significant rise in Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking children (UASCs) and makes recommendations for meeting the growing challenges in this area which are affecting all local authorities.

This report provides early evidence that the Placement Strategy is already having an impact on front line practice and recommends the Placement Strategy Board is tasked with measuring the effectiveness of Cabinet's significant investment in making sure children are safe and securely attached, improving outcomes and reducing external placements.

This paper RECOMMENDS that further analysis of the child in need and child protection populations are undertaken to isolate more specific risk factors for care and what constitutes an effective intervention. This work should draw on the learning and recommendations of the Neglect pilot and OSCB’s reviews of adolescents who have died and suffered or caused serious harm.

This paper RECOMMENDS that a multi-agency group is established to devise a county-wide strategy to respond to the growing challenges nationally of Unaccompanied Asylum Seekers and Refugee families.

Oxfordshire has taken a radical and proactive approach to the spiralling costs of external placements and has significantly invested to create in-county edge of care, fostering and residential capacity.  The effectiveness of this investment in safeguarding, improving outcomes and reducing external placement costs will require close scrutiny over the coming year.   This paper RECOMMENDS that the Placement Strategy Board is tasked with measuring the impact and cost savings of the Placement Strategy reporting up to Cabinet.

The Cabinet considered (CA8) a report which reviewed the performance and outcomes of Looked After Children and Care Leavers  since April 2014 and identified key challenges moving forward, particularly around understanding the causes for and then addressing the growth in the looked after population.

Welcoming the report Councillor Gill Sanders referred to the impact of unaccompanied asylum seeking children and the pressure on services. She asked how the Multi Agency Group referred to in paragraph 82 would be constituted and whether we would be working with partners in its establishment.

Responding Matthew Edwards advised that district involvement and joint working on support networks would be key. Work would continue to scope out need.

Also on paragraph 82 Councillor Stratford expressed some concern that independent district action with regard to refugee families could impact on the county council’s budget.

Responding to a question from Councillor Carter regarding the Mockingbird Family Model (paragraph 50) officers explained that the project was aimed at providing more support for foster families who looked after more challenging children. It was a community based model and was being piloted in the city and north of the county.

Councillor Tilley commended the report and moved the recommendations.

RESOLVED: (unanimously):

(a)          that further analysis of the child in need and child protection populations be undertaken to isolate more specific risk factors for care and what constituted an effective intervention. That work should draw on the learning and recommendations of the Neglect pilot and OSCB’s reviews of adolescents who had died and suffered or caused serious harm;

(b)          that a multi-agency group be established to devise a county-wide strategy to respond to the growing challenges nationally of Unaccompanied Asylum Seekers and Refugee families;

(c)          the Placement Strategy Board be tasked with measuring the impact and cost savings of the Placement Strategy for reporting up to Cabinet.

Cabinet Member: Deputy Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/098

Contact: Sue Corrigan, County HR Manager Tel: (01865) 810280

Report by Chief Human Resources Officer (CA9).

This report gives an update on staffing numbers and related activity during the period 1 October 2015 to 31 December 2015.  It gives details of the actual staffing numbers at 31 December 2015 in terms of Full Time Equivalents.  These are shown by directorate in Appendix 1. In addition, the report provides information on the cost of posts being covered by agency staff. 

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the report.

The Cabinet considered (CA9) a report giving an update on staffing numbers and related activity during the period 1 October 2015 to 31 December 2015. 

Commending the report Councillor Rose moved the recommendation.

RESOLVED: (unanimously) to note the report.

At their meeting on 4 February 2016, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment (Councillor Hudspeth substituting) made on 14 February 2016 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet for it to consider in the light of the following material concern:  that the officers dealing with the matter had not been made aware of the fact that a 1500+ signature petition had been presented to Council opposing the proposal;

The following documents are attached (CA10):

(a)      a report setting out the names of the Councillors who have required the call in and the reasons given for the Call in.

(b)      the report considered by the Leader of the Council together with an extract of the minutes of the delegated decision session.

(c)      additional information provided to the Performance Scrutiny Committee in response to the call in

(d)      a note of the material concern of the Performance Scrutiny Committee (e) report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy to Cabinet.

On 4 February 2016, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment (Councillor Hudspeth substituting) which had been made on 14 February 2016 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee had agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet to consider in the light of a material concern that officers dealing with the matter had not been made aware of the fact that a 1500+ signature petition had been presented to Council opposing the proposal.

Councillor Brighouse presented the comments from the Scrutiny Committee.

Mark Beddow felt that the current layout worked well with no clear justification to change things. There was insufficient room in Station Road for the new arrangement to work efficiently and pedestrian safety would be compromised particularly in the vicinity of The Cornerstone. It would also detract from the recently awarded Didcot Garden Town status and discriminated against elderly shoppers who would be required to walk greater distances from shops such as Sainsbury.  He felt the Cabinet should at least defer a decision.

David Bird confirmed that the 1500 signature petition had been considered when the planning application had been approved and he referred to a letter of acknowledgement from the Deputy Director for Environment (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) to that effect. There was need for retail expansion and the traffic regulation order had been through a great deal of scrutiny with no procedural or technical reasons for it not to proceed.

Responding to Councillor Rose he confirmed that the petition had been considered by both South Oxfordshire District and Oxfordshire County Councils.

Councillor Hards did not consider that the petition had been taken fully into account or considered when Councillor Hudspeth had taken his decision on 14 January nor by the South Oxfordshire District Council Planning Committee when it granted permission. Speakers at that meeting had been given insufficient time to state their case and he considered that the scheme was being promoted purely to meet the requirements of the  bus companies and it should not go ahead.

Councillor Rose confirmed that the petition had formed part of the consideration of Cabinet at this meeting.

Councillor Greene felt that consultants and developers had been allowed to influence council officers. Endorsing the comments regarding the lack of democratic opportunity afforded to people to make representations to the district planning committee he felt the application and scheme had been pushed through. A better option would have been to pursue provision of the Didcot Northern Perimeter Road.

Addressing the specific terms of the call-in Mr Kemp confirmed that the petition had been identified by the district council as part of its deliberations and that had been minuted accordingly. The petition had also been considered by county officers and although not specifically mentioned in the report considered by the Leader of the Council on 14 January it would not have influenced the officer recommendation to him.  The A4130 Northern Perimeter Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20/16

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Sue Whitehead, Committee Services Manager (01865 810262)

The Cabinet Procedure Rules provide that the business of each meeting at the Cabinet is to include “updating of the Forward Plan and proposals for business to be conducted at the following meeting”.   Items from the Forward Plan for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet appear in the Schedule at CA11.  This includes any updated information relating to the business for those meetings that has already been identified for inclusion in the next Forward Plan update.

The Schedule is for noting, but Cabinet Members may also wish to take this opportunity to identify any further changes they would wish to be incorporated in the next Forward Plan update.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.

The Cabinet considered a list of items (CA) for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet together with changes and additions set out in the schedule of addenda.

RESOLVED:          to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.